Appellant’s criticisms of court misconceived in costs application

Court of Appeal determines that the Workplace Relations Commission and an employer were entitled to their costs following the dismissal of an appeal. The appellant's attempt to avoid costs by criticizing the conduct of the hearing and the judgment itself was rejected, with the court emphasizing the principle that a party entirely successful in civil proceedings is entitled to costs unless exceptional circumstances dictate otherwise. The Court also declined to award costs on a legal practitioner and client basis, noting that its disapproval of the appellant's conduct was already evident and that a similar order regarding High Court costs had been made previously.